Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 05:56pm PT
|
Unhinged is a minion, a very small cog in the machinery that floods millions of feet of celluloid and broadcasts endless hours of "drama" and bloodshed desensitizing, inspiring and glorifying violence.
He introduces a straw dog,
Look over here!
There are evil looking black rifles out there!
Even though you are far more likely to be pummeled to death with bare hands and fists than ever even injured by one. (DOJ stats)
But how many murders have been inspired by his industry?
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 05:57pm PT
|
Not MORE laws... BETTER laws.
TGT, UK has a violent crime rate 3.5 times HIGHER than the US, and 1/3 the number of murders. Why is that? What is the single most obvious difference? (hint: it has to do with having access to certain tools... and it ain't hamburgers or hammers.)
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 05:59pm PT
|
Every kind of gun mis-use you can imagine is already illegal. What makes you think "better" laws will be any more likely to be obeyed / enforced than the laws already on the books?
|
|
xtrmecat
Big Wall climber
Kalispell, Montanagonia
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:04pm PT
|
It is hilarious watching people shout and cry about how more laws, or tougher laws will deter criminals. It also is pathetic watching people spout off about how things are, with little to no consideration about different areas and cultures, only seeing the world from their neighborhood. Sad is probably the better term.
Burly Bob
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:06pm PT
|
Yup. Better laws. Gun free zone laws don't work. Except for Giffords, all mass murders over 4 casualties have been in Gun free zones. Shoulda made that law BETTER.
What about murder laws. Those could have been better.
If you think better means outlawing a tool that can be used to murder with, it is a slippery slope with no end. Remove one tool, and another will come along, that isn't logical.
Better laws will then have to be more laws. Banning the whatever people use to murder with next. Or do you truly think that Guns are the only weapon that is bad for people to kill with? Because if guns were not there, they would use something else and many people would still be killed by another method.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:09pm PT
|
Why do you think the number of drunk drivers on the road went down drastically when they started DUI check points?
It is just too fuking easy for me to buy a guns, sell them to someone WITH NO RECORD of the transaction, and have them end up in the wrong hands.
Each year, thousands of firearms are reported as lost or stolen.
oops, lost another one. Guess I'll just have to fill out another 10 min of paperwork and wait 10 days.
Here's a good place to start regarding BETTER laws.
ATF maintains the Interstate Theft Program, which is a voluntary reporting program that handles the theft or loss of firearms from interstate shipments. Since there is no legal reporting requirement regarding such activity, there is a risk that these thefts will not be reported or investigated because of questions regarding jurisdiction.
You see where FEDERAL regulations might come in handy there? It really ain't that hard to comprehend. I don't know why so many of you have to continue acting like dipshits.
Here's another specific area where BETTER regulation could work:
FFLs are required by statute to report to ATF the sale of two or more handguns to the same purchaser within five consecutive business days.
Why would someone ever NEED to purchase more than 1 hand gun a YEAR, or even a MONTH? Oh, right...
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:14pm PT
|
But the guns used at sandy hook were stolen. And when she went to report it.... BAM! Were any other of these massacres that are motivating you to make more and better laws done with stolen weapons?
If you don't have a logical answer, please, feel free to comment on genitalia size.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:22pm PT
|
James Holmes purchased his weapons legally. His inspiration don't mean sh#t if he wasn't allowed to EASILY stockpile weapons and ammo through Amazon.
It should have been required to disclose Adam's mental health issues before Ms. Lanza was allowed to purchase her weapons and strict safety requirements should have been required for her to own them. Similar disclosures and enhanced safety precautions should be required for people living with, or frequently interacting with, ex-cons (if they aren't already).
Common sense.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:26pm PT
|
I can't think on one mass shooting where the shooter obtained his weapons legally? Can you name any?
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:29pm PT
|
We was crazy. He is saying so in court. Crazy people are "prohibited persons" as far as legal firearm ownership goes. Lying on the purchase forms is ILLEGAL, and any weapon obtained in that manner was obtained ILLEGALLY.
Holmes obtained his weapons fraudulently, and that ain't legal. In fact, it's a felony - a felony that if enforced, would have saved lives.
Weschrist would have you believe some felonies are legal.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:31pm PT
|
FUKING
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:31pm PT
|
IDIOTS
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:34pm PT
|
ATF maintains the Interstate Theft Program, which is a voluntary reporting program that handles the theft or loss of firearms from interstate shipments. Since there is no legal reporting requirement regarding such activity, there is a risk that these thefts will not be reported or investigated because of questions regarding jurisdiction.
http://www.atf.gov/publications/factsheets/factsheet-national-tracing-center.html
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:35pm PT
|
But the guns used at sandy hook were stolen. And when she went to report it.... BAM! Were any other of these massacres that are motivating you to make more and better laws done with stolen weapons?
stolen? yeah I guess so if you consider a son going to the house he lives in and taking them
she went to report it? No, he killed her immediately then went to the school, she never had a chance to "report it"
anyone can sit in the bleachers and state the obvious, like what good are laws when people won't follow them anyhow?
How about you putting forth some real specific suggestions of your own that you know from your deep intellect and experience will mitigate mass gun murders in the US?
thanks
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:36pm PT
|
…That is, after all, what the constitution says.
Actually it is not.
Many serious constitutional scholars, and the SCOTUS in its recent decision Heller decision, agree that the preamble (“A well regulated militia…”) and the body (“The right of the people to keep and bear arms…”) were intended as harmonious statements, not in tension as Hedge would lead us to believe.
I quote here the conclusion of an excellent article on the subject:
“In recent years it has been suggested that the second amendment protects the "collective" right of states to maintain militias, but not the right of "the people" to keep and bear arms. If anyone entertained this notion in the period in which the Constitution and Bill of Rights were debated and ratified, it remains one of the most closely guarded secrets of the eighteenth century, for no known surviving writing of the 1787-1791 period states that thesis. Instead, "the people" in the second amendment meant the same as it did in the first, fourth, ninth and tenth amendments, i.e., each and every free person. A select militia as the only privileged class entitled to keep and bear arms was considered as execrative to a free society as would be select spokesmen approved by government as the only class entitled to freedom of the press. Nor were those who adopted the Bill of Rights willing to clutter it with details such as non-political justifications for the right (e.g., self-protection and hunting) or a list of what everyone knew to be common arms, such as muskets, scatterguns, pistols and swords. In light of contemporary developments, perhaps the most striking insight made by those who originally opposed the attempt to summarize all the rights of a freeman in a bill of rights was that, no matter how it was worded, artful misconstruction would be employed to limit and destroy the very rights sought to be protected.”
Dr. Stephen P. Halbrook is Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. Dr. Halbrook received his J.D. from the Georgetown University Law Center and Ph.D. in social philosophy from Florida State University, and he has taught legal and political philosophy at George Mason University, Howard University, and Tuskegee Institute. His newest book is The Founders Second Amendment.
Here’s the article should you care to read it.
Hedge, when you refer to slavery as a way to discredit the founders you betray your lack of understanding of history. It is clear that they did the best they could to sew the seeds for slavery's demise, while still forming a union. I.E they set a date to end importing of slaves, they arranged the first census so as to assure that slave states were a minority in Congress, and then there are the words of the Declaration.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:36pm PT
|
Some things are just out of our hands, Norton, and cannot be controlled.
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:37pm PT
|
I was being sarcastic Norton.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2013 - 06:47pm PT
|
ok tooth, I did not get your sarcasm, thought were you serious
and chaz? yeah maybe there really is nothing we can do about it
but you know, let's wait until tuesday or so this week when Vice President Biden gives the results of his talking to people on both sides of the gun issue, along with the study group's suggestions
I would like to hear if you think any of what they come up with is agreeable with you?
or are you predisposed to basically reject any new legislation as being won't work, no new laws needed because they won't be followed, over reaching big government, or whatever reasons can be pulled out of the bag because as you said, maybe we just can't do anything anyway?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!